I am sorry for my lack of diplomacy and sugar-coating and diplomacy, but after installation, those icons are the very first thing the user sees. Many people will be baffled by them.

The corner thing is strange. Is it a folded corner, or detached? It uses so much area.

The area of the icon that conveys information is needlessly small, about 1/4 of the total area. Regardless of logo/legend design itself there just isn't enough room and resolution to show it. They cropped the top for the folded corner. They cropped the bottom for the shading effect, which enters too far into the icon. I don't know why there is so much side margin.

The text in the Writer icon doesn't look like text.

Make the Calc icon look like a spreadsheet. Yes, indeed, a white background, with a black grid looks boring, but that's exactly what a spreadsheet looks like.

The Draw's icon shading becomes too light to see white against it.

Noting that, the Math legend/logo has a good start, but fill the symbols. No outlines. People see objects by the edges of filled objects. If you don't believe me, drop a dozen coat-hangars on the floor, and try picking them up by lifting the top one, without snagging any others.

For LibreOffice safe mode, perhaps you could put a red cross, or a bandage over it, to differentiate it from the standard one?

Want inspiration: I hate Microsoft, but the Windows 11 Calculator icon looks modern and great.
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Windows_Calculator_icon.png

The Linux Mint Cinnamon Shut-Down and Lock-Screen icon are big, bold, not hollow. Good.

FreeFile Sync has a recognizable icon.

The OSX, Calender icon looks pretty much like an old Calendar. The trash-can icon looks like a trashcan.

Demotivational: I love Audacity, but it takes a while to see the dark blue headphones on a black background. Inscape's black brush, is nearly invisible against a black background. It must be an in-joke why VLC's icon is a traffic cone. Paraview appears to have copied Tandy's Color Computer 3 nameplate. X-Rite put a whole paragraph of text on an icon, for some unknown reason. Adobe's icons are trash because instead of showing pixels of a bitmap, or a non-linear segment or a movie, they start to spell the name of the program. Does the Windows 11 Notepad icon, looks like any notepad you've seen?

Thanks for giving your thoughts on the new app icons elsewise we won't really know what the majority of the userbase thinks. About the complaints:

I do not understand what you mean by "not functional/broken". But I see that you prefer the old logic of most icons being literal and not abstract. But the old icons also were not totally literal; what were the base shapes supposed to be, behind the white parts?

That shape is basically preserved in the new icons and of course that important change is the pointy top-right triangle edge which initially symbolized arrows "of progress" ( that's what the author of the original icons said I believe ) so I wanted to add that point edge so they do remind more of arrow beaks. Those corner triangles existed in the previous set too, I'm not sure why you wanted to note that now.

No Microsoft did not make those, the only major idea that ties them is the idea that icons in the office suite should be mainly distinguishable by color. It's a coincidence what colors are tied to each LibreOffice module/app.

I don't think I cannot design some "more usable" icons, nor these ones were approved because of inner connections ( I really am an almost total stranger, I only got into the mood to contribute some new icon set ).

I don't know if people will really be baffled... Do they look that different from the previous icons?

The areas that convey information occupy almost the same space as their co-responding old parts. The icons were made to look pixel-perfect on various sizes ( there may be a problem on Windows10/11 on unusual system-wide scaling options but it's a known issue )

I do not understand what you mean by "the shading effect enters too far into the icons". And the margins are also more-or-less the same as the old ones ( they look bigger in size because the obvious white "paper" layer was removed )

The way text is represented on the Writer icon is exactly the same on how it was represented in the old ones: with simple lines ( only evident differences are the color and rounded edges ).

I have to admit you are kind of right about the Draw icon... but I don't want to make the base colors darker. I don't know whether it truly affects people with eye disabilities but I personally can distinguish the shapes from a good distance.

I do not understand exactly what you suggest for the Math icon.

We could apply a mechanism that could generate special icons for safe-mode sessions but we need somebody who has the knowledge and mood to do it. I don't know if we have/can find one who wants to do it. This idea reminds me of how GNOME deals with Stable/Nightly app icons.

The MS Windows11 calculator icon does not really help: it's a standard calculator icon.

The rest are just about taste/preferences. Thing is many people felt fine with not changing the icons but many others thought something new should come. So I made these icons which in many aspects remind of the old icons, but now they are more distinguishable from each other, there's improved visual consistency and overall they look more conforming to the late "minimal" trends. That was the idea in general.

The frustration of seeing new icons is really temporary but you forget it later on ( yes I also feel like most icons I see are not "perfect" but they are just icons in the end and most sets feel consistent and kind of trendy, that's just what I believe ).

All I can suggest is to keep such worries around, in bugzilla, link them together and if we conclude that a lot of people are unsatisfied perhaps new icons could be made. But we cannot really change branding every 1-2 years. If I noticed any significant disatisfaction with the icons earlier I would not have proceeded with these icons. Surely many seem frustrated but many more feel fine with them. I might want to note more stuff but nothing else comes to mind now.

By the way there is a page where icons of various other proposals are kept:https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Design/Mimetype_Icons/Proposals

We run a poll with two different proposals and the current one won. I disagree that icons have to be kind of a thumbnail of the application. It rather needs to quickly identify the application among other, which it does better than in the past as many comments recently confirm, and it should convey clearly the brand, which is taken care of with the paperclip symbol. Please also consider that we support all major operating systems and have to blend into the modern look and feel.

Nevertheless we monitor the comments and appreciate all input. If more users will join the critics we should reconsider the decision to resolve the ticket as NAB.

PS: needsUXEval requires CC ux-advice@ to reach out for the design/UX people.

The process to design the new icons occurred through months and months.
It was iterative and open to feedback from the community through the entire process. Where was the bug opener through this entire process to raise his concerns?
Should the new icons be discarded when someone clearly not involved comes to spread hate about the icons?
Should we discarded the work and feedback from the tens of people that helped the designer who spent hundreds of hours doing the work? IMO, no. 

The person should get used to them. I fundamentally disagree that icons should convey usage. If that is the case what usage does Adobe Acrobat icon or Photoshop icon convey? Or GIMP icon? Or Spotify icon? Or Microsoft Office icons?
You have hundreds of examples of applications where icons don't convey usage.
Even if we go by the flawed reasoning of the bug opener, the old icons also didn't properly convey usage anyway.

The icons are broken if most users cannot immediately identify what they are trying to convey. In the new icon set, about 1/2 of the space is wasted and blank. Indeed, many icons are checked for various resolutions, and while nothing is "perfect," these icons don't work when they are small because they waste too much space for a given resolution. 

Did you put the new icons against the old ones in the poll?

Color should not be the only identifier for an icon, as 1:12 people are color-blind. Ref: https://www.colourblindawareness.org/colour-blindness/

I don't know if people will really be baffled... Do they look that different from the previous icons?

When viewed on a black background, the lower right of the icon is indistinguishable from the background.

They icon should look like what it's meant to convey. If it's a word processor, and people still write documents, then boring as may seem, the background should look like paper with text on it. The old writer icon worked much better.

The math icon has a decent looking small block of characters that look like formulas, but why should they only occupy a portion of the icon. The look of the icon should not be more important than information or understand-ability.

[For instance, Futura is one of my favorite fonts. I love the look of it, but it cannot be used for highway signs--because it's not as readable as Highway Gothic.]

You were quick to discern that the Windows Calculator icon was only a standard calculator icon--because you could identify it. If it had a small bird on the lower half, I don't think you would be so quick. : )

Much of commercial graphics is not art; it's formulaic. Paragraph: use serif fonts. Legend: use san-serif fonts. There isn't enough room on an icon to lay down a cathartic work. People need to be able to look at it, and immediately know what it means.

"The frustration of seeing new icons is really temporary but you forget it later on..."

Well, it's later-on, and I still think that they do not work. to mind now.

Some suggestions:
Use most of the icon space for symbols and information.
Pick one effect: clipped corner or shading.
Make paper look like paper.
Use solid symbols, not hollow ones.

(In reply to BrendaEM from comment #5)
> Some suggestions:
> Use most of the icon space for symbols and information.
> Pick one effect: clipped corner or shading.
> Make paper look like paper.
> Use solid symbols, not hollow ones.

Sounds like a plan. And if you have experience in icon creation you are very much welcome to create a better set or to join the design team and educate us.

I agree that the symbol-to-container aspect ratio and the colors can be improved. In fact I am about to push a better color for Math help pages after Mike Kaganski noted it was too similar to Impress'. Mea culpa! Those observations are actionable, self-contained issues that can be addressed in separate, similarly self-contained bugs, minus the knee-jerk reactions. We all act in good faith in contributing to LO.